Patient-Reported Outcomes of Capsular Repair Versus Capsulotomy in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy: Minimum 5-Year Follow-up—A Matched Comparison Study
Authors
Domb BG, Chaharbakhshi EO, Perets I, Walsh JP, Yuen LC, Ashberg LJ
Journal: Arthroscopy. 2018 Mar;34(3):853–863.e1
DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2017.10.019
PMID: 29373289
Background
The role of capsular closure in hip arthroscopy remains debated, especially regarding long-term outcomes.
Methods
This matched comparative study followed patients who underwent either capsular repair or unrepaired capsulotomy with a minimum of 5-year follow-up. PROs, revision and conversion rates, and complications were analyzed.
Key Findings
Both groups improved significantly postoperatively, but patients with capsular repair had more sustained improvements in PROs and satisfaction. The unrepaired group showed decline in mHHS and higher conversion to arthroplasty (18.5% vs 10.8%).
Conclusions
Capsular repair during hip arthroscopy may provide more durable outcomes and lower conversion rates to arthroplasty. However, both techniques met meaningful clinical thresholds.
What Does This Mean for Patients
Capsular repair may enhance long-term satisfaction and hip function, but both approaches can be effective. Surgical decisions should be individualized based on patient-specific factors.